Re: Re[4]: Which M camera?

[Paul Schliesser <paulsc@eos.net>]

>A lot of Leica users and collectors believe that M4-2 and M4-P are not up to 
M4 or M3 in 
>quality and solidity.

The difference in feel of the film advance is the complaint that most 
people make about the M4-2 and beyond. The M4-2 and nearly identical M4-P 
were the first "stock" bodies designed to use a winder. Leitz beefed up 
the gears in the film transport mechanism to withstand the extra stress 
and remain reliable. I think that the gears were brass before, and were 
made heavier and changed to steel. The self timer was sacrificed because 
of the extra space these internal modifications took up. The heavy-duty 
film transport doesn't have the silky smoothness of the earlier cameras, 
but this doesn't mean that the Canadian factory did a bad job or that 
it's less well made.

I do think that the write-on disk in place of the film reminder dial 
thing on the back door is a pretty goofy cost-savings alteration.

I have an M4-2 and an M3. The M3 is slightly heavier than the M4-2 and 
does feel slightly more solid, but I have no complaints about the M4-2. 
Mine obviously had a hard life before I got it; it has a lot of 
scratches, dings and brassing (er.. zincing), but works flawlessly, so I 
can't fault its robustness.

Do any of you out there use an M-series camera with a winder? I have the 
first type of M4-2 winder, which I bought used for $79 (so you can 
imagine how ugly it is). I only use it for studio work with a Visoflex, 
for which it is very handy. Since they made the cameras winder-ready, I'm 
curious how many of them are actually used that way.

- - Paul